Canon EOS 1D X vs Canon EOS 600D

Winner
Canon EOS 1D X

100

Canon EOS 600D

50

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 1D X

Low noise at high ISO
Low light performance
2,786 ISO
Great image quality
Overall image quality
82.0
Great color depth
Color depth
23.8 bits
Wide dynamic range
Dynamic range
11.8 EV
 

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 600D

Screen flips out
Flip-out screen
Great for movies
Badge
Phase detection autofocus
fast and accurate
Sensor cleaning
Self cleaning sensor
Avoids dust in your photos
Supports 24p
24p movies
For that film look

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 1D X.
Explore our gallery of 49 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 600D.

competitors

Canon EOS 1D X Competitors

Canon EOS 5D Mark III

Canon EOS 5D Mark III

Pro DSLR

$2,190 - $2,499 body only

$2,699 - $3,099 with 24-105mm lens

Size Much smaller
True resolution Higher true resolution
Low light performance More noise at high ISO
Canon EOS-1D X Mark II

Canon EOS-1D X Mark II

Pro DSLR

$5,494 - $5,999 body only

Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Low light performance Much more noise at high ISO
Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Canon EOS 1D Mark IV

Pro DSLR

$1,197 body only

Dynamic range More dynamic range
Lowest price Significantly cheaper
Low light performance Significantly more noise at high ISO

Canon EOS 600D Competitors

Canon EOS 700D

Canon EOS 700D

Entry-level DSLR

$1,624 body only

$496 with 18-55mm lens

HDR Has in-camera HDR
Autofocus Video autofocus
Color depth Worse color depth
Canon EOS 1200D

Canon EOS 1200D

Entry-level DSLR

$294 body only

Autofocus Video autofocus
Lowest price Cheaper
Screen resolution Significantly lower resolution screen
Canon EOS 750D

Canon EOS 750D

Entry-level DSLR

$599 body only

$447 with 18-55mm lens

Dynamic range More dynamic range
Color depth Better color depth
Viewfinder size Slightly smaller viewfinder

discussion

Canon EOS 1D X
EOS 1D X
Canon

Report a correction
Canon EOS 600D
EOS 600D
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments